在 1 月 31 日的 AMA 中，CZ 直接回应了围绕币安、BNB 和 BNB Chain 的市场批评和社区辩论。他否认了币安或他个人操纵市场或导致 10 月 10 日抛售的说法，强调此举是由宏观因素驱动的，没有任何一个实体能够真正控制比特币的价格。 在 Binance Alpha、上市和 Meme Rush 上，CZ 将 Alpha 视为生态系统的接入层，而不是背书。他承认 Meme Rush 存在执行问题，同时强调中立用户的担忧值得认真关注。他还重申，交易所提供准入机会，但不保证回报，投资决策最终取决于用户。 关于市场前景，CZ 对近期的“比特币超级周期”采取了更为谨慎的立场，预计比特币将持续波动。从长远来看，他仍然看好比特币，并认为比特币优于黄金，尽管更广泛的全球共识需要时间才能形成。他还重申了币安的 100% 准备金和准备金证明方法，并指出过去的压力测试已经证明了该平台的资产安全性和流动性。音频记录是由 GPT 生成的，因此
可能存在一些不准确之处。请在以下位置收听完整播客：YouTube：https://youtu.be/Oz2oCapXXeYSpotify：https://open.spotify.com/episode/7qaJznodLZ50x7LHfdidg9?si=suEUk_ZTR_i94PMPuuIjmACZ 对 Aster 项目的看法问题：CZ，您对 Aster 项目有何看法？CZ：我真的不这么认为想对具体细节发表评论。从广义上讲，我认为永久DEX是一个长期存在并持续增长的行业，而Aster是BNB链上的原生项目。我是他们的顾问之一，我认识这个团队很多年了，所以我的观点显然有些偏见。也就是说，我确实尊重这个团队，并且我对这个项目持积极态度。我个人也持有相当数量的Aster。我能分享的就这么多了。 CZ 直接回应市场 FUD、操纵索赔和
In a January 31 AMA, CZ responded directly to market criticism and community debates surrounding Binance, BNB, and BNB Chain. He rejected claims that Binance or he personally manipulated the market or caused the October 10 sell-off, stressing that the move was driven by macro factors and that no single entity can realistically control Bitcoin’s price.
On Binance Alpha, listings, and Meme Rush, CZ framed Alpha as an access layer to the ecosystem rather than an endorsement. He acknowledged execution issues with Meme Rush, while emphasizing that concerns from neutral users deserve serious attention. He also reiterated that exchanges provide access-not guaranteed returns-and that investment decisions ultimately rest with users.
Regarding market outlook, CZ took a more cautious stance on a near-term “Bitcoin supercycle,” expecting continued volatility. Long term, he remains bullish on Bitcoin and views it as superior to gold, though broader global consensus will take time to form. He also reaffirmed Binance’s 100% reserves and proof-of-reserves approach, noting that past stress tests have demonstrated the platform’s asset safety and liquidity.
The audio transcript was generated by GPT, so there may be some inaccuracies. Please listen to the full podcast on:
YouTube:
Spotify:
https://open.spotify.com/episode/7qaJznodLZ50x7LHfdidg9?si=suEUk_ZTR_i94PMPuuIjmA
CZ’s View on the Aster Project
Question: CZ, what do you think about the Aster project?
CZ: I don’t really want to comment on specific details. Broadly speaking, I believe perpetual DEXs are a sector that will exist and continue to grow long term, and Aster is a native project on BNB Chain. I’m one of their advisors and I’ve known the team for many years, so my view is obviously somewhat biased. That said, I do respect the team and I’m positive on the project. I also personally hold a fair amount of Aster. That’s about as much as I can share.
CZ Responds Directly to Market FUD, Manipulation Claims, and Binance Alpha
Question: CZ, I want to briefly address the recent wave of FUD. As a long-term supporter and BNB holder, it’s clear to me that much of this FUD is organized. But pretending everything is fine doesn’t really help the community.
I think users broadly fall into three groups: core supporters, FUD spreaders, and the much larger group of neutral users. The third group isn’t emotional-they’re observing and deciding-and they’re the ones who most need clear communication.
From current discussions, several issues need to be addressed head-on: listing criteria, Binance Alpha, BNB Chain support, and meme-related products, especially Meme Rush. Personally, I don’t really see the value of Meme Rush and feel it has created more confusion. I hope you or the Binance team can clarify these points.CZ: Thanks for the feedback. These are very specific and valid questions. Let me start by addressing the broader situation around FUD and complaints. The people expressing dissatisfaction today actually come from very different motivations and backgrounds.
First, a disclaimer: I don’t run Binance anymore and I don’t represent the company. This is a personal AMA, and my views are from a shareholder and user perspective.
Regarding recent FUD, the main accusation centers on the October 10 market drop. Some people claim Binance caused it, but the facts are quite clear-macro news, including tariff-related developments, came out before the sell-off. Those external events triggered the volatility. It wasn’t caused by Binance’s systems or actions. At the time, all platforms in the industry were simply reacting to a surge in trading activity.
As for claims that Binance sold assets, dumped the market, or deliberately pushed prices down-I can say this very clearly: neither I personally nor Binance trade crypto for profit. We do hold a significant amount of Bitcoin, but those are our own assets. That’s very different from firms that raise capital specifically to buy Bitcoin. In terms of balance sheet holdings, Binance may be one of the largest Bitcoin holders globally, but that doesn’t mean market manipulation.
From a logical standpoint, these accusations don’t hold up either. Bitcoin is roughly a $2 trillion market. For any single entity to crash it by dumping would require taking on enormous risk-easily tens or hundreds of billions of dollars. That’s simply not realistic.
On top of that, Binance.com is now a regulated global exchange. Regulators like ADGM can review all accounts and transactions, and there are also U.S. monitors in place. There’s no room for “backroom” behavior. If someone still believes Binance or I manipulated the market, that’s a view disconnected from reality and not helpful for long-term success.
I’ve also seen more extreme claims, like saying my net worth came from dumping on users. Those figures come from Forbes estimates and don’t represent actual cash holdings. I haven’t sold company equity or large amounts of crypto to convert into fiat. In fact, I don’t like holding fiat or even stablecoins long term-I’d rather hold Bitcoin and BNB. So those claims are false as well.
On system issues: during extreme peak periods, there were minor performance issues affecting a very small number of users. From what I know, affected users were compensated, and Binance goes well beyond industry standards when it comes to user protection. No technology works perfectly 100% of the time-networks fail, cloud services go down, social platforms glitch. If your trading strategy assumes zero system risk, that’s already a risk management problem.
There have also been cases where losses had nothing to do with system issues, yet people still tried to claim compensation, or even asked Binance to take responsibility for an entire market-wide crash. That’s simply unreasonable.
On Binance Alpha: I don’t design products. From my understanding, Alpha is an access layer-it provides a centralized interface to explore the decentralized ecosystem. It’s not the same as a formal listing, and it’s not an endorsement. The bar for spot listings is much higher.
Without Alpha, users would have to go elsewhere to access DeFi, and Binance would lose users. As for complaints that Alpha includes too many projects with mixed quality-that’s a misunderstanding. Just because a token is visible doesn’t mean you have to buy it. Good projects will attract attention; bad ones won’t.
Many people assume that if Binance provides access, it’s responsible for price performance. That’s a misunderstanding of what an exchange does. An exchange provides access and a marketplace, not guaranteed outcomes. Research, judgment, and decisions ultimately rest with users.
Sources of FUD, Community Sentiment, and the Meme Rush Debate
Question: Over the past two or three days, negative comments about you have clearly increased. How do you see these voices, and where do you think they’re coming from?
CZ: This isn’t hard to understand. In Chinese there’s a term called shuijun-literally “water army.” It’s a well-developed industry. Often competitors pay people to spread false information or launch coordinated attacks. These accounts are usually easy to spot: new accounts, small followings, no prior interaction. Sometimes they even pay large KOLs to join in. I honestly wouldn’t recommend doing this-it’s not worth it long term and it damages your reputation.
Another group comes from people who lost money recently, especially around October 10. They’re looking for someone to blame. If you don’t take responsibility for your own trades and only blame others, it’s very hard to succeed long term. You choose when to buy and sell. I’ve never told anyone to buy or sell any token. Blaming me or Binance for losses is really just avoiding responsibility.
There’s also a group that didn’t necessarily lose money but still tries to pressure me or Binance-asking for compensation, or demanding Binance buy more Bitcoin, for example. Overall, the sources and motivations behind these attacks are quite mixed.
Addressing the Meme Rush Controversy and Real Community Concerns
Question: I’d like to add one point. Users generally fall into three groups: core supporters, FUD spreaders, and the much larger group of neutral users. The third group is the one that really needs clear explanations-they just want to understand the current situation and where things stand.
In reality, maybe only 1–2% of users are actively supporting or spreading FUD, while the remaining 98% have genuine questions-Meme Rush being a good example. Personally, I don’t really understand the positioning of this product. But the reality is, whenever something is related to Binance or BNB Chain, the criticism eventually ends up directed at you. How do you see this?CZ: I understand what you’re saying, and I agree with the “98% of users” point. On Meme Rush specifically, I want to be clear: I didn’t design this product. I only learned about it after it went live. The original idea was to reduce rug pulls and scams by being more selective, improving the overall quality of meme projects, and helping them connect more quickly to Alpha within the BNB Chain ecosystem.
That said, I also agree that the execution wasn’t great. There were a lot of issues, including heavy PVP dynamics. The team tried to iterate and adjust multiple times, but the results were limited. I’m also not a meme coin trader myself, so I’m not deeply familiar with all the details.
On user scale, if Binance has around 300 million users, even one unhappy user per 100,000 already means 3,000 people. On social media, 3,000 voices can sound extremely loud. But most users are actually rational, and those genuine concerns deserve to be taken seriously. I think Binance has already done a lot here-arguably more than what would normally be expected.
As for claims on social media like “Binance caused the October 10 drop” or “CZ manipulated the market,” those are simply impossible. Binance reacts to the market; it doesn’t create the market, and it’s certainly not something I could manipulate personally.
So I tend to separate the noise into two categories. Pure FUD is usually very easy to spot. But real feedback about products, user experience, and mechanisms-that’s something we absolutely listen to. Personally, most of my time now is focused on the BNB Chain ecosystem, incubating projects, Giggle Academy, and longer-term building.
Does FUD Actually Work? The Real Impact-and the Backfire Effect
Question: We’ve been talking a lot about FUD. Do you think these attacks actually work? Do they achieve what the people behind them want?
CZ: In a way, they do work-but usually in the opposite direction. You can’t keep attacking a person or a platform without constantly repeating its name. What that really does is give the platform free PR and more exposure.
For both new and existing users, repeatedly hearing “Binance” or “BNB” creates a strong impression: this is the biggest and most influential platform in the industry. Claims like “Binance can manipulate the market” or “Binance caused the crash” actually make Binance sound extremely powerful-almost like the only platform that matters. As a result, many people who didn’t use Binance before end up checking it out and signing up.
My own social media stats are a good example. Over the past year, my follower count barely grew, probably because the platform was constantly removing bots. But recently, growth has clearly accelerated and outpaced those removals. For most companies, the real danger isn’t being attacked-it’s being ignored. No discussion, no attention.
That said, FUD does have negative effects. When a lot of FUD hits at the same time, it creates fear in the community and can push prices lower. That hurts everyone, including those spreading the FUD who also hold crypto. So its impact is multi-layered and often very different from what the organizers intend.
At the same time, it can also backfire in positive ways. It tends to unite supporters. When users see baseless attacks against me or the platform, they often become more vocal and more loyal. We’ve seen this many times-each major attack usually strengthens Binance’s core user base.
That’s also why, even through some of the toughest periods in Binance’s history, including issues related to the U.S. DOJ, Binance’s market position didn’t weaken-it actually improved. So yes, FUD does have an impact, but usually not the one its creators are aiming for.
I’ll end with one point that some people may not like, but it’s fundamental: respecting yourself means taking responsibility for your own decisions and actions. If you constantly blame others, whether in life or in investing, it’s very hard to achieve long-term success.
I firmly believe Binance has gone far beyond what’s required when it comes to protecting users. That’s why, despite constant FUD and negative attacks, around 300 million users still choose to use Binance.
Bitcoin Supercycle After the Pullback and CZ’s Personal Investment Approach
Question: With the recent market pullback, do you still think a Bitcoin supercycle is possible this year? And for retail investors, do you have any suggestions on portfolio adjustments beyond BTC or BNB?
CZ: On the Bitcoin supercycle, to be honest, I was more optimistic a few weeks ago. Recently, though, with the amount of FUD in the community and emotions getting amplified, I’m less confident than before. More FUD and stronger emotions usually have a negative impact on the market. On top of that, we’re in a highly uncertain global environment-geopolitics and macro conditions are both hard to predict-so I expect high volatility to remain the norm for a while.
As for portfolio advice, I’m really not the right person to give specific recommendations. Everyone has different risk tolerance, capital structure, and areas of familiarity. What works for me may not work for you.
Personally, my approach is very simple-and honestly, pretty boring. I mainly hold Bitcoin and BNB long term, plus a small amount of Aster. I don’t do complex or aggressive investing. I’m more of a builder than a trader, and most of my time goes into building platforms, incubating projects, and working on long-term initiatives like Giggle Academy. So when it comes to detailed investment strategies, I’m not a great reference.
Deep Market Pullbacks, Supercycle Odds, and Market Outlook
Question: Given the recent deep market pullback, do you still think a “supercycle” is possible this year?
CZ: I still think it’s possible, but the uncertainty is very high. Even if that’s my view, it doesn’t mean I’m right-I’d say there’s close to a 50% chance I’m wrong. That’s why I don’t recommend anyone base their investment strategy on a single person’s opinion. Over the long run, that approach usually doesn’t work well.
CZ: Bitcoin Is Superior to Gold, but Consensus Takes Time
Question: I know you usually avoid price predictions. But your debate with Peter Schiff at the Dubai summit really stood out to me. Gold has been performing strongly, yet I believe Bitcoin is superior to gold in many ways. How do you see this?
CZ: I agree with you-fundamentally, Bitcoin is better than gold. But we also have to be realistic: Bitcoin is still a very new asset, and overall adoption remains relatively low. Gold’s market cap is roughly ten times larger than Bitcoin’s, which means far more people understand it, hold it, and trust it.
This is more about familiarity and historical accumulation than about technology. On top of that, given today’s highly unstable geopolitical environment, many people prefer assets they already understand and can rely on in extreme situations-and gold fits that role well.
So even though I firmly believe Bitcoin is superior in terms of monetary properties and technology, it doesn’t mean everyone will accept that immediately. It takes time. It’s similar to AI: the potential is huge, but full-scale adoption and impact don’t happen overnight.
In short, I’m very clear that Bitcoin is better. The harder question is timing-whether that advantage is fully reflected today, in a few years, or even a decade from now. That part is simply difficult to predict.
How AI Will Reshape Trading and the Future of Exchanges
Question: Do you think AI will shape the future of trading and exchanges? If so, in what ways?
CZ: I think AI will have a massive impact on almost every area, including trading, markets, price discovery, and execution.
On the trading side, AI will significantly lower the barrier to entry. Today’s trading interfaces aren’t very user-friendly-you have to read charts, enter prices and sizes, place multiple orders, and deal with constant market movement. A more ideal setup is simple: you tell the AI what you want, for example, “convert 10% of my stablecoins into Bitcoin or BNB,” and the AI figures out when and how to execute, aiming for something close to VWAP or the best average price. If the size is large, it can automatically split orders to reduce market impact.
On the research side, AI can dramatically improve efficiency-analyzing project quality, risk, on-chain data, and community sentiment much faster than humans. Work that used to take a lot of time can be done far more quickly.
AI also has clear advantages in high-frequency trading and reacting to news in real time, but that’s an area better suited for institutions with deep capital and advanced infrastructure. I wouldn’t recommend most retail users compete there.
Beyond trading, AI will be widely used in customer support, risk management, and operations. As the technology matures, it will touch almost every part of exchanges and the broader financial system.
The same applies to blockchain. As blockchain technology matures, it will continue to reshape the entire monetary and financial system-from payments to lending to debt structures. That’s my overall view on how AI and exchanges will evolve.
How Binance Safeguards User Assets and Maintains Full Reserves During Extreme Market Conditions
Question: During periods of extreme market volatility, how does Binance manage user funds to ensure it remains fully reserved?
CZ: First, a quick clarification-I’m no longer involved in Binance’s day-to-day operations. I’m speaking based on what I know as a shareholder.
From my understanding, Binance uses Proof of Reserves, which is currently the most straightforward way for users to independently verify that their assets actually exist on the platform.
At a high level, Proof of Reserves is a mathematical verification method, often built on structures like Merkle trees. It allows users to confirm that their balances are included in the exchange’s total assets without exposing individual account details. I won’t go deep into the technical side, but the key point is that it’s verifiable.
Binance was among the first exchanges to fully implement Proof of Reserves. It’s also a regulated platform-assets are audited, and on-chain wallet addresses are publicly disclosed, so anyone can track them. From an industry perspective, this is a very high level of transparency. Fundamentally, Binance operates as a 100% reserve platform.
In practice, Binance has also been stress-tested. In December 2022, the platform processed roughly $14 billion in withdrawals within a single week, when total assets were around $60 billion. On one day alone, withdrawals hit about $7 billion. In traditional finance, that kind of situation would likely be called a bank run.
Because Binance is fully reserved, those withdrawals were handled smoothly, without liquidity issues. At the time, I was still at Binance, so I remember this clearly. It was a real-world test that demonstrated the platform’s reserve strength and liquidity.
For institutional users, there’s also the option of third-party custody solutions like Ceffu. Assets can be held with an independent custodian while still being used to trade on Binance via mechanisms like Binance Mirror. These setups are also on-chain verifiable and provide an additional layer of asset protection.
Follow us
Twitter: https://twitter.com/WuBlockchain
Telegram: https://t.me/wublockchainenglish